The draft City of Fremantle Bicycle Plan has been approved for release for public comment. One amendment made to the Plan relates to Tydeman Road, but not this North Fremantle connector path. The accepted amendment which was put up by Rachel Pemberton is:

Pg 50 - Tydeman Road – enable safe bike access in and out of Bracks Street by cutting into the traffic islands at Walter Place and Tydeman Road

I small fix and one that can be down quickly so at least some awareness exists of issues with Tydeman Road.

Aushiker wrote:The draft City of Fremantle Bicycle Plan has been approved for release for public comment. One amendment made to the Plan relates to Tydeman Road, but not this North Fremantle connector path. The accepted amendment which was put up by Rachel Pemberton is:

Pg 50 - Tydeman Road – enable safe bike access in and out of Bracks Street by cutting into the traffic islands at Walter Place and Tydeman Road

I small fix and one that can be down quickly so at least some awareness exists of issues with Tydeman Road.

The latest update on the signs at the North Fremantle Train Station end ... it took an "embarrassing" email to the City of Fremantle Mayor (who replied) and CEO (who hasn't) to get this latest outcome ...

So some good news; according to Main Roads WA Congdon Road is not a gazetted road and as such the signage I requested was rejected based on this. This also means that the existing NO ENTRY signs are not enforceable by law as they were not put in under approval from them (this would not bother a particularly zealous Police officer i would presume).

At present, Congdon St is not maintained by the city, it is a PTA asset. I have previously been given AIP to erect the bicycles excepted signage and for simplicity/consistency have issued a works request for them to be installed by the city.

So it seems no-one knew who managed what in terms of road infrastructure. Seriously you would think the Council was on top of this when the planned the connection path

Great work, Andrew, thank you for your persistence with this. I know first hand how frustrating, tedious and time consuming it can be to be dealing with incompetent people. Is it too much to expect that Council's engineers are actually competent engineers? As you said, it shouldn't take a resident or road user to get it right.

Government at all levels is knobbled by a lack of self interest in planning issues. Council staff including the planners typically don't live in the area that they plan for. They don't use the parks, playgrounds, bike paths or pavements. They don't shop or eat out at night in the area. Their experience of the suburb, aside from their (mostly) car based commute in and out to the council office, is not aligned with that of a resident. The result is planning for "compliance". The Mayor is a resident and has done a bit of responsive inorganic planning, good on him!

I guess that was my point. In this instance someone thought outside the compliance box, actioned something that was supposed to improve matters for peds and cyclists and came a mild cropper on the compliance issue.Compliance has stood in the way of a number of council proposals for improvements to bike paths, projects that undoubtedly improved cyclist safety. Compliance has become an ass.

and the saga continues ... below is my email from tonight to the Mr Graham MacKenzie, CEO of the City of Fremantle as they have now installed the "bicycle excepted" signs facing the WRONG WAY. The extent of the incompetence shown by Mr MacKenzie and his staff is really beyond belief.

Dear Mr Mackenzie

It is most disappointing that I am yet again emailing you in respect to getting the signage right on the North Fremantle shared path.

Well you got the "bicycle excepted" signs put up, you know those signs that should have gone up in the first place if the path design had been done properly.

However those new signs have been put up facing the WRONG WAY!

The only positive here is that this what occurred with the last set of signs, so at least the incompetence is consistent.

Is it too much to ask that such a simple task be done properly?

For the historical record I have attached some photos of the of the new signs insitu.

As much as I try to love my fellow humans there's a point, sadly, where one has to admit defeat and realise that some folk have their limits. The inefficiency of doing simple tasks twice should have dawned on local government employers long ago. It sounds a lot but if they paid 30 or 40% more they'd be in a position to hire some people who weren't focussed on coke and chips and the job would stand half a chance of being done right the first time. Win/win; save money AND stop irritating the contituents!